Today I am talking with Zaki Haidari and Dr Anthea Vogl on Australia’s immigration system and the use of the “Code of Behaviour”. Zaki is a 2020 Australian Human Rights Commission Human Rights Hero, an Ambassador for the Refugee Advice and Casework Service, and works at Amnesty International as a Refugee Rights Campaigner. Zaki himself is a refugee, having fled Afghanistan after being targeted to be killed by the Taliban and has survived a terrifying boat journey to Australia in 2012. Despite this and a range of social, legal and financial obstacles, he has thrived, learning English and has become a well-known and respected human rights advocate speaking about the cruelty in Australia’s refugee system. Anthea is senior lecturer at the UTS Faculty of law. Her work takes a critical and interdisciplinary approach to the regulation of migrants and on-citizens, with lots of this content falling within refugee, migration, and administrative law and theory. She is one of few Australians to highlight the issues in the Code of Behaviour. As I mentioned, today we discuss the Code of Behaviour. In 2013, then Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Scott Morrison, introduced a Code of Behaviour for asylum seekers released from detention. In order to be released from detention, asylum seekers must sign the code. The Code contains obligations on asylum seekers that both duplicate, and exceed the criminal law. These include requiring people to not make sexual contact with another person without their consent, to obey existing Australian laws, and undefined content, like to not engage in any, and I quote “anti-social or disruptive activities that are inconsiderate, disrespectful or threaten the peaceful enjoyment of other members of the community”….you know, like possibly advocating for your human rights. If you are found by the Department to have breached any of these conditions, you can have your welfare taken, or be put back in on-shore or off-shore detention. All of these provisions are part of what’s called refugee and administrative law. They have all of the flavour and consequences of criminal law, but without any of the checks and balances before courts. Zaki has lived this and Anthea has researched this. Anthea’s research reveals all of these features in more depth, but also, that that non-governmental organisations are being co-opted into acting as police and surveillance officers of refugees and migrants. We enter a new Albanese government with new Ministers for Immigration and for Home Affairs. This Code was written with a Ministry pencil, and can be erased at a Ministers discretion – Parliament was never involved. Consider writing to your local MP and the Ministers for Immigration and Home Affairs to have this inhumane code removed immediately.

[Note: Apologies for my audio at times - need a new microphone!]   This episode is recorded from the sovereign lands of the Wurundjeri People of the Kulin Nation. First Nations people have been custodians of this land for tens of thousands of years. Colonisation is a process that law and regulation, have been deeply complicit in, taking land, sea, children and lives, and I note that stolen wages and racial discrimination in the workplace being are another historic and contemporary example. I want to acknowledge that despite colonisation, 60 000 years of wisdom continues, and so too does non-Aboriginal Australia’s obligations to take a daily personal responsibility to do support reconciliation through truth and justice. One of the central gaps in this podcast has been how the workplace, or the relationship between the worker and the employer, is regulated. I’ve been fortunate to speak to Josh Bornstein to help us navigate this space. Josh is a Principal Lawyer with Maurice Blackburn and National Practice Leader of both its Social Justice Group and its Employment and Industrial Relations Group. In 2019, he was awarded Workplace Relations Partner of the Year by Lawyers Weekly. He’s got over 20 years of experience as an employment and industrial relations lawyer, addressing bullying, sexual harassment and representing some of Australia’s key unions and civil society organisations. He’s on the board of progressive think tank, the Australia Institute, and has written loads of articles, that I’ll put in the shownotes. Josh takes us on a journey through some of the key issues and opportunities in 2022 with a new federal government, the chronic issues facing gig workers in the Australian economy, we take a lovely detour to discuss digital platforms and their regulation, before reflecting on Josh’s work around gender equality. A wonderful episode that I could have run for much longer! I hope you enjoy the episode. Rate it and share it as usual ploiiise. Shownotes Recent articles by Josh: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7595716/how-to-fix-hatred-online-impose-a-duty-of-care/ https://www.themonthly.com.au/blog/josh-bornstein/2022/31/2022/1648679235/great-wealth-redistribution#mtr https://thenewdaily.com.au/opinion/2022/02/08/democratic-recession-josh-bornstein/ https://www.theguardian.com/business/commentisfre

Professor the Honourable Kevin Bell AM QC is the Executive Director of the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, Commissioner for the Yoo-rrook Justice Commission, and Co-Chair of the Steering Committee of the National Mental Health Commission National Stigma and Discrimination Reduction Strategy. Among his many accomplishments, as Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria and President of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Professor Bell has presided over some of Victoria’s most important human rights judgements, including Patrick’s Case and the 2017 PBU & NJE case on electroconvulsive treatment. Today we spoke about law, the role of judges in directly or indirectly exercising oversight of systems and how taking a human rights based approach can lead to the best experiences of and outcomes from, the courts. [A note on language: there are diverse ways to understand and describe distress. Different terms are used in this podcast. We discuss in the episode, the need to acknowledge labelling and power in how terms like mental illness and mental health are used] Show notes Guardian Australia pieces on Victoria’s mental health regulator: Story on under-enforcement: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/may/26/no-action-taken-against-victorian-mental-health-services-despite-more-than-12000-complaints?CMP=share_btn_tw Olivia’s story: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/may/29/you-dont-have-a-choice-victorias-mental-health-regulator-criticised-over-complaints-handling?CMP=share_btn_tw Cases discussed (explainers) Patrick's Case: https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/p-j-b-v-melbourne-health-anor-patricks-case-2011-vsc-327-19-july-2011PBU & NJE: https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/about-us/news/landmark-judgment-strengthens-patients-rights-in-compulsory-electroconvulsive-treatment-casesMatsoukatidou Case: https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/2017/4/24/victorian-supreme-court-rules-that-courts-have-fair-hearing-and-equality-obligations-to-assist-self-represented-litigants

Today is another wonderful episode examining a hidden issue – children and young people as family violence survivors. Often when we discuss family violence, they’re absent in our mind, if we imagine them at all, it’s often as extensions of the mother. But children and young people are often victim-survivors themselves, either witnessing family violence, or directly experiencing family violence. Melbourne City Mission’s Amplify report, written with young people, examines where the law, regulation, our systems and our communities are failing young people. Interactions with policing, healthcare, housing and education systems should provide opportunities for help, but often they become another instance of harm for young people. I’m joined today by two experts who have been involved in the report, Shorna Moore and April. Shorna is a social justice lawyer and advocate and is dedicated to driving positive social change for children and young people. She is currently the Head of Public Policy and Government Relations at Melbourne City Mission. Shorna brings almost 15 years’ experience in executive policy and advocacy roles across the community legal, youth and homelessness sectors and has led successful campaigns on issues including family violence and youth homelessness. Shorna also draws on her own lived experience of family violence, adding depth and understanding to her work. April – a pseudonym – is a youth advocate passionate about changing community service systems so they work better for children and young people experiencing family violence. April has lived experience of family violence and works with children and young people experiencing family violence in her capacity as a peer worker and consultant. She’s also working with Melbourne City Mission and sits on the Victim Survivor’s Advisory Council as a rep for young survivors. A note today, that as you may guess, this episode touches on difficult experiences, including suicide, sexual assault and family violence. Please stay close to your supports as you listen to this episode if you need. Show notes Amplify report: https://www.mcm.org.au/news/silent-victim-survivors-of-family-violence#:~:text=The%20report%2C%20titled%20Amplify%3A%20Turning,justice%20and%20mental%20health%20systems.

A cracker today with Colette Einfeld, an expert in public policy and in particular “nudge policy”. Colette is days away from a finished PhD that examines how knowledge is used in nudge and behavioural insights. Nudge theory or policy, if you haven’t heard of it, is a concept from behavioural economics, political theory and the broader behavioural science that we can harness human cognitive processes and biases to shape a group or individuals behaviour for public policy purposes. It’s become a big deal in public policy. But so has co-design, the idea that you use design methodologies to develop policies, services and systems with the people who are most affected by those policies, services and systems. The reason I reached out to Colette is that they have co-authored a very influential paper (with Emma Blomkamp) looking at the relationship between these ideas of nudge and co-design. Do they work together, or against one another? Let’s find out. Shownotes: The academic article from Colette and Emma Blomkamp Blomkamp: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01442872.2021.1879036#:~:text=Nudge%20is%20an%20approach%20to,to%20respond%20to%20shared%20problems. A blog by Colette and Emma: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2021/07/22/the-incompatibility-of-nudge-and-co-design-as-tools-for-policymaking/

Today I am speaking with Emeritus Professor of Law from the University of Sydney Law School, Terry Carney. If you think you have an original opinion, Terry probably already wrote it, like 20 years ago. Terry has written on and worked in, mental health law, child welfare, adult guardianship and administration law, and for the narrow purposes of this episode, social security law. In addition to overseeing the writing of the Social Security Act in 1991, Terry served 40 years as a member of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal, and its successor, the Social Services and Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Today we spoke about the Online Compliance Intervention policy, or as you would know it, robodebt. I asked Terry how the policy came about, what kinds of logical and legal errors it committed, and what those errors reveal about our public sector, public policy making and regulatory oversight systems. It’s not clear that we are in a better place a year or two away from Robo-debts collapse, so listen to what Terry says we need to do to reform the system. Show notes Calls for a Royal Commission from expert Dr Darren O'Donovan: https://theconversation.com/the-problem-is-not-fixed-why-we-need-a-royal-commission-into-robodebt-141273 A brief on the "Thodie" report mentioned by Terry: https://theconversation.com/report-on-public-service-overhaul-a-good-start-but-parliamentary-inquiry-is-needed-127602  Brief article from Terry on automated welfare: https://www.ejaustralia.org.au/wp/social-security-rights-review/automated-decision-making-in-welfare/

Today I am speaking with Associate Professor Camilla Nelson. Camilla is an expert and writer on gender, law and media cultures at the University of Notre Dame. Camilla has authored several books, including recent essay collections called On Happiness and Dangerous Ideas About Mothers. I’m interviewing Camilla on her recent book co-authored with Professor Catharine Lumby, Broken: Children, parents and family courts. In the discussion we highlight how the family courts have strayed from their original intention 50 years ago, how political violence has shaped their culture, and that this means children and women are often less safe after going through the system. A content note that this talk does discuss family violence. Please call 1800 respect if you require assistance, or I know that you have your trusted supports. Timestamps Why regulation matters to children, women and families in the family court system (2:00)How a lack of regulation of predatory lawyering is impacting families (11:00)How the current family laws function to regulate and reinstate patriarchal relations between parents (19:00)How access obligations can operate as surveillance systems on parents (26:30)How this wasn’t the intention of Parliament when Gough Whitlam passed the Family Law Act 1974 (32:45)How political terrorism led to more influence of men’s rights activists over the family law system (36:15)How neutrally-appearing laws favour men over women in family law (43:00)What kinds of changes do we need to make to improve the system (46:30)What you can do to help (53:30).   Show notes On the recent conviction of Leonard Warwick (the “Family Court Bomber”), 35 years after he committed the offence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWvRgq5eylo   Write to your MP and the Attorney General! Locate your local Commonwealth MP: https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/MembersThe Attorney-General’s office (the Minister responsible for the legal system): https://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/contact   Subject Line: Reform our family court system based on the rights of the child   Dear [Insert]   I am writing to you as a member of the [insert electorate]. I am contacting you to seek your public support and action to reform the Family Law Act 1974 (Cth) to better reflect the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Children today have fewer rights in family law processes than they did in 1974. Australia signed the Convention of the Rights of the Child in 1990, but we still see no action to implement this in the family court. In casting my vote this election, I will be assessing whether you have fought for the inclusion of greater rights for children to be involved in the decisions that affect their lives. The work to implement this has been done by countless previous law reform processes. The time for action to protect parents and children is now.

Today I speak with Deborah Glass, Victoria’s Ombudsman. The Victorian Ombudsman has led the way in promoting human rights across the State. Recent investigations into the treatment of public housing residents during lockdown, the solitary confinement of young people in youth detention, the practice of State Trustees in managing people’s assets, and the treatment of women in the Dame Phyllis Frost Centre, reveal these human rights issues. They also reveal the importance of urgent and effective implementation of OPCAT in Victoria. In this episode we examine how the Ombudsman believes human rights look should guide government decision-making and the Victorian Ombudsman’s role in supporting or examining that. Of the 25 episodes in the podcast, this was the first in-person episode. I hope you are as excited about that as I am!   Shownotes The Ombudsman for Human Rights: Case Book: https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/our-impact/investigation-reports/the-ombudsman-for-human-rights-a-casebook/ Investigation into the Solitary Confinement of Children and Young People: https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/our-impact/investigation-reports/opcat-in-victoria-a-thematic-investigation-of-practices-related-solitary-confinement-of-children-and-young-people/ Investigation into Dame Phyllis Frost Centre: https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/our-impact/investigation-reports/implementing-opcat-in-victoria-report-and-inspection-of-dame-phyllis-frost-centre/ Investigation into Public Housing Towers Lockdown: https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/our-impact/investigation-reports/investigation-into-the-detention-and-treatment-of-public-housing-residents-arising-from-a-covid-19-hard-lockdown-in-july-2020/

I am recording this from the sovereign lands of the Wurundjeri people. First Nations people have been custodians of this land for tens of thousands of years. Colonisation is a process that law and regulation, have been deeply complicit in, taking land, sea, children and lives. I want to acknowledge that despite ongoing colonisation, 60 000 years of wisdom continues, and so too does non-Aboriginal Australia’s obligations to take a daily personal responsibility to support reconciliation through truth and justice. Today is international trans day of visibility. It is an annual celebration of trans pride and awareness, recognising trans and gender diverse experiences and achievements. It is also an opportunity to examine how regulation has shaped the lives of trans and gender diverse folk, often for worse, but hopefully for the better as we move forward. What better way to do that than with Lee Carnie who is a queer non-binary advocate I’ve been fortunate to work with. Lee Carnie is a human rights lawyer, advocate and campaigner who has worked on progressive law reform campaigns for LGBTIQA+ rights for a number of years. Their currently the ED of advocacy and campaigns at Foundation for Young Australians and were previously the founding legal director at Equality Australia, Australia’s first national LGBTIQ+ legal advocacy and campaigning organisation. This conversation covers some difficult terrain, particularly for members from the LGBTIQA+ community, so please be sure to reach out to your networks if difficult and big feelings come up for you. I hope you learn a lot from this episode as I did. Shownotes If you need to talk to someone: QLife (1800 184 527) / www.qlife.org.auLifeline 13 11 14VMIAC Check In (Victoria) (1800 845 009 / www.vmiac.org.au) Reports mentioned: End the Hate: https://www.hrlc.org.au/reports/end-the-hate Safeguarding the End of the Rainbow: https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/lgbtihealth/pages/668/attachments/original/1585530052/Safeguarding-the-End-of-the-Rainbow-Booklet-V1.pdf?1585530052 Where you can go to support: Trans Day of Visibility: https://tdov.org.au/

In August 2021 the Cultural Review of the Adult Custodial Corrections System commenced. It looked at the culture, experiences, systems and processes within Victoria’s prisons and correctional centres. It looked at how these processes do or don’t serve people in custody, and corrections officers working in these settings. It is due to report in the middle of this year. What disappointed me during the announcement was that on the Expert Panel, which I would add has great expertise and importantly representation from Jill Gallagher who is a prominent and eminently qualified First Nations leader and advocate, is that there was not a person who has lived experience of corrections. There was representation of people who work in the criminal justice system. That imbalance does a disservice to the process, and to people currently or formerly in the system. It should have been remedied. People with lived experience have been consulted in this process, but as you will hear from Sarah and Jenny, people with lived experience have ample capacity to critically evaluate evidence. By failing to have someone with lived experience on the panel, it reinforces the othering, and tells the community that they shouldn’t be heard as experts. I want to thank Natasha Dewhirst from Flat Out for supporting this process by connecting me to Jenny and Sarah (pseudonyms I should add), who were both paid for their time and expertise on this podcast. I also want to thank Monique Hurley from the Human Rights Law Centre, who is interviewed and made it happen. Most of all I want to thank Jenny and Sarah, who’s words still ring in my head. I won’t reflect on the themes of this conversation, I’ll just say listen and act on what these three human rights advocates have to say.   Shownotes: Flat Out Learn more about Flat Out: http://www.flatout.org.au/ Sign on to the Homes not Prisons campaign: https://homesnotprisons.com.au/#open-letter The Women Inside & Out (WIAO) Program is an innovative approach to supporting women who have been criminalised. Based on research, evidence and feedback from the women we have worked with, we have secured three years of philanthropic funding to deliver a longer-term model of care. This project commenced in February 2020 and is funded until February 2023. The Women Inside and Out Program provides assertive in-reach and outreach support and advocacy services for the increasing number of women in Victoria’s prison system. Through a combination of inclusive support and case management practices, women in the Inside and Out Program will be able to access supports up to six months before they are released and maintain the same worker for a further twelve months when in the community. In this way, relationships built on trust can develop, leading to better outcomes for women in; housing, finances, mental health, physical health and wellbeing, drug and alcohol, social inclusion, and other areas identified by the women. This program is an important opportunity for Flat Out to develop an improved model of care – through social impact outcomes monitoring and evaluation. The learnings from this program will inform a new Best Practice approach to working with criminalised women. Human Rights Law Centre Learn more about the Human Rights Law Centre: https://www.hrlc.org.au/ See their joint submission (with Flat Out and other orgs) to the Corrections Review: https://www.hrlc.org.au/submissions/2021/12/1/cultural-review-of-the-adult-custodial-corrections-system

Today’s episode is with David Manne, Executive Director and Principal Solicitor of Refugee Legal, an organisation established in 1998 to provide legal advice and representation to people seeking asylum or migration. David has been practicing immigration and refugee law for over 30 years, and has taken the Australian government to task on its immigration policies and laws, including in several high profile decisions. Today we spoke about our immigration system and the enormous power of the executive arm of government, and why that should worry all Australians who care about the rule of law, justice and fairness. Inhumane immigration policy is largely bipartisan policy in Australia, so it is incumbent on us to force major political parties to give us a choice. Show notes: How you can donate: https://refugeelegal.org.au/get-involved/donate/

Today, on international women’s day, I am speaking with Dr Anjalee de Silva, a postdoctoral fellow at with the Melbourne Law School node of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society. Anjalee is an expert in administrative, anti-discrimination, and free speech and media law and theory, with a focus on harmful speech and its regulation. Her PhD examined vilifying speech directed at and about women, and the role that law could play in regulating, deterring and mitigating those harmful forms of speech. Today’s conversation is wide-ranging, examining how gendered hate speech effects women, communities and democracy, but also revealing its functions – the silencing and subordination of women. Anjalee’s illustration of this latter point, the function that gendered hate speech serves, was articulated better than I have heard elsewhere, and it will inform work I am doing in mental health related vilification, so thanks Anjalee. But more central to today, the episode is a reminder of the work ahead of us – both legislative and cultural – to re-order society on a more equal basis. Shownotes: The following from Dr de Silva: A report on gendered hate speech A longer form article in the Melbourne Uni Law Rev [open access]An article on the need for a response by digital platforms Information on MP Fiona Patten's 2019 anti-vilification Bill. Check out The Week on Wednesday! A podcast from Van and Ben on news and current affairs from the perspective of workers.

Today I speak with Professor Sharon Friel. Sharon is an ARC Laureate Fellow, Professor of Health Equity and Director of the Menzies Centre for Health Governance at the School of Regulation and Global Governance (RegNet), Australian National University. Her research focuses on the political economy of health; governance and the planetary, social and commercial determinants of health inequities. Her 2019 book “Climate Change and the People’s Health” highlights the importance of addressing the global consumptogenic system. Today we spoke about some of her recent work with colleagues called Power and People’s Health. We often talk about the social determinants of health – what structural or social factors lead to health or ill-health. We’ve been talking about it for decades. That social and health policy, as well as health governance, needs to look beyond the health system, towards social policies in housing, planning, trade, including policies that are controlled and implemented by local communities. But despite decades of research supporting this, it doesn’t happen. Power. That is something we often speak about when discussing why the social order remains in tact to the benefit and disadvantage of different communities and sectors. Reading Power and People’s Health, and talking with Sharon today, I saw for the first time a framework that can help us examine, in empirical terms, how power sustains the racism, sexism and neoliberal ideologies that continue to undermine health and the health system. Show-notes: Power and People's Health: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34192622/ (DM Simon/author if you can't get copy) Menzies Centre for Health Governance: https://regnet.anu.edu.au/research/centres/menzies-centre-health-governance

Today I speak with former Senator Scott Ludlam. Scott Ludlam served as the Senator for Western Australia from 2008 until 2017, advocating on environmental justice, human rights, and also, which we won’t be able to talk about today, national security laws and the resulting surveillance we as citizens experience. Today’s topic is big enough. State Capture. The World Bank defines State Capture as “the exercise of power by private actors – through control over resources, threat of violence, or other forms of influence – to shape policies or implementation in service of their narrow interest”. It is a term I hadn’t heard of until I read Scott’s wonderful book, Full Circle. And just last week, Scott Ludlam, as part of the Australia Democracy Network, released a report on State Capture. It’s pretty brutal, but there’s hope. It’s brutal because it shows how much of our political system has been flipped to meet the needs of private interests rather than our interests, and that elections alone won’t fix the problem. But there’s hope because the report reveals that there are immediate and practical reforms that we can push our politicians to address, now. There has been a theme emerging across interviews with George Williams, Andrew Wilkie and now Scott Ludlam – it is that our democracy is on a slippery slope, but there’s points that we can exit this slide. We just need to be clear and deliberate about it. Show notes: Learn more about State Capture: https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/state-capture-and-democracy-in-australia-and-the-importance-of/13757632 Endorse the framework for a fairer democracy: https://www.ourdemocracy.com.au/the-framework/

I am recording this from the sovereign lands of the Wurundjeri people. First Nations people have been custodians of this land for tens of thousands of years. Colonisation is a process that law and regulation have been deeply complicit in, taking land, sea, children and lives. I want to acknowledge that despite that, 60 000 years of wisdom continues, and so too does non-Aboriginal Australia’s obligations to take a daily personal responsibility to do support reconciliation. Part of that responsibility is to advocate for the rights of First Nations families, parents and children. Today I speak with Liana Buchanan, the Commissioner from the Commission for Children and Young People – CCYP for short. Liana has a rich history working in human rights across community legal centres, human rights agencies and in reviewing and giving oversight to correctional settings. The CCYP has a really broad mandate that we’ll talk to, but as the name suggests, it is to give voice to the rights and interests of children and young people. Today we spoke about what the CCYP does, how they approach oversight of services such as  child-protection, and what this role means within the context of ongoing colonisation faced by First Nations people. We discuss the importance of lived experience to regulatory oversight work, something that I think should be built into many regulators. Shownotes: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Child-Friendly Version): https://www.ccyp.wa.gov.au/media/1216/poster-united-nations-january-2008.pdf CCYP's regulatory approach to the Child Safe Standards and Reportable Conduct Scheme: https://ccyp.vic.gov.au/about-us/our-regulatory-approach/#:~:text=The%20Commission's%20approach%20to%20regulation%20and%20working%20with%20organisations.&text=Our%20Regulatory%20Approach%20provides%20organisations,can%20expect%20from%20the%20Commission.  Current and past CCYP inquiries: https://ccyp.vic.gov.au/inquiries/systemic-inquiries/

Today I’m talking with Professor George Williams AO. George is the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, of Planning and Assurance, Anthony Mason Professor and Scientia Professor at UNSW. He has written and edited 37 books, including on the Uluru Statement from the Heart, Federalism, Terrorism, Human Rights, National Security and Social Justice. Suffice to say I am talking to another leading expert on regulation. Today George and I discussed the role of corruption, truth and regulation in Australian politics. In December 2018, Scott Morrison promised that if elected, he would establish a federal Independent Commission Against Corruption. A draft exposure Bill was introduced in 2020, but has been roundly criticised by experts, academics, and the legal community, stating that it is woefully inadequate, and that it would conceal, rather than reveal and address, corruption. In that time, we have seen the normalisation of scandals regarding the potential misuse of public money, including through independent report from the Australian Auditor General. It is not an exaggeration to say that we sit at the top of a slippery slope, and if we don’t get off now by creating good accountability measures on government to prevent corruption, it’s not clear where we will end up. An important conversation.                                                  Timestamps: Why regulation matters to George (3:00)Why we need to move beyond the “all politicians lie” approach (4:30)The limitations of the Commonwealth Government’s proposed ICAC (10:00)Why the NSW ICAC model is receiving unwarranted criticism (14:00)Explaining what Australia looks like if we continue down a path without anti-corruption protections (16:00)What George would like you to do today (19:00)

Today I’m speaking with the Honourable Andrew Wilkie, Independent Member for Clark. Andrew’s concerns with regulation and governance are some of the most publicised in modern Australian history. On 11 March 2003, Andrew resigned from his role as an intelligence official at the Office of National Assessments over concerns about the impending Iraq War. He was the only intelligence official in Australia, the US or the UK to publicly resign before the invasion. Upwards of 1 million Iraqi nationals died as a result of that war. From that point Andrew has done many things, including being in Federal Parliament since 2010. He has been an outspoken advocate on many issues left out of public debates by the main political parties. I wanted to speak to Andrew because of his work on two key issues that intersect with regulation: gambling, and political donations. Today we spoke about both, and Andrew tells us how he has connected to the issues, how the current system is failing, what the Parliament can do to fix it, and what you can do to make sure the Parliament does fix it. Timestamps Why regulation matters to Andrew and his community (2:15)Andrew's work in gambling reform (6:15)The harms arising from gambling (13:00)The links between gambling policy and political donations (20:00)How reforming political donations would change our lives and system (28:00)What our Commonwealth Parliament can do to fix gambling laws (31:00)One thing that Andrew wants you to do (34:00) Show notes: Hon Andrew Wilkie's key integrity policies: https://andrewwilkie.org/integrity/ An ABC article on political donations, referencing Wilkie: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-23/how-gambling-industrys-biggest-political-donors-influence-votes/100592068

Today I speak with Karen Toohey, the ACT Discrimination, Health Services and Disability & Community Services Commissioner since 2016. After a career in marketing and IT in the private sector, Karen joined the Australian Human Rights Commission in 1995 and has since  worked in senior executive  roles in state and commonwealth human rights agencies including time in Victoria as the CEO of the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission and Assistant Commissioner at the Office of the Australian Information Commission. Karen has managed statutory complaint handling & conciliation functions in state and territory agencies for over 20 years. Karen has  qualifications in law, marketing and computing science and is a well known advocate on issues of human rights and discrimination law.   In the episode today, we had a wide-ranging discussion on how she approaches her role. Complaints handling and regulation in the human rights space is hard, least not because Karen has so many different areas and industries that she handles complaints from. But that breadth allowed for a fascinating conversation about what I think of as “street-level justice” provided by these complaints bodies. I think of them as street level justice, because they’re far more accessible than going through laborious and costly court processes. A quick note my audio was a bit choppy, that’s because it was 36 degrees in Melbourne and I just had to keep the fan on. Sorry, not sorry. Please enjoy the episode. Timestamps: Why regulation matters to Karen (2:15)Karen explains her broad role (6:00)How to strike the balance between being responsive to industry, and being captured by industry (21:30)How to remain impartial, but still enforce the law in challenging times (31:00)How to deal with power imbalances between marginalised people who make complaints and those they complain about (41:00)The unique challenges regulating health services from a human rights perspective (47:00)The personal qualities required to lead human rights regulators (56:00)One thing Karen wants regulators to go away and do (1:06:00)

Today I speak with Steven Caruana. Steven is Coordinator of the Australia OPCAT Network, a coalition of over 200 non-government organisations, academics, statutory officer holders and interested individuals concerned with the effective implementation of oversight to Australian places of detention. He is also a Specialist Advisor to the Australian Human Rights Commission and is involved in monitoring designated mental health units as an Official Visitor. Beyond this, Steven’s previous experience is enormous, having worked at the Disability Royal Commission, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission and the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. Much of Steven’s work today stems from a Churchill Fellowship granted in 2017, in which he reported on how other countries monitor places of detention, and what we can learn in Australia. Today we discussed OPCAT. The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. So yeah, OPCAT for short hay. It’s an international agreement outlining how our Australian governments need to monitor places of detention. It’s really important, and today is a historic day. Today, we were meant to have implemented OPCAT fully, but it’s a patchwork across Australia, and in states like NSW and Victoria, we’ve barely started. This matters. Abuse in disability settings, Aboriginal deaths and abuse in custody, the many human rights violations I’ve seen in mental health services – they all continue because our governments aren’t monitoring places of detention. Be sure to listen in on this episode and remind Parliamentarians why this matters. Shownotes: An article from the Australian Human Rights Commission on our failure to implement OPCAT: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-20/djokovic-australia-immigration-detention-hotel-scrutiny-opcat/100767220?utm_source=abc_news_web&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_web  Article from Steven and Professor Penelope Weller: https://www.rmit.edu.au/news/acumen/opcat Article from Steven on OPCAT in prisons: https://www.croakey.org/looking-in-on-the-inside-why-opcat-is-needed-for-australian-prisons-detention-centres/ How Tasmania leads the rest of Australia: https://www.abc.net.au/radio/northtas/programs/drive/opcat-implementation-tasmania/13720332

Today I am interviewing Dr Lisa Parker, an Honorary Lecturer in the School of Pharmacy, at the University of Sydney. Her research focus is on public health ethics and policy, particularly the influence of values, evidence and industry on health care policy and practice including digital health technologies. Dr Parker also has her feet close to the ground, currently working as a medical clinician in oncology. We discussed the concerning role that pharmaceutical companies can play in influencing decisions within hospital settings as well as within consumer or patient groups. Dr Parker’s words are considered and thoughtful, leaving me in no doubt about the need to tighten regulation in this space. Timestamps: Why does regulation matter to you and your community (1:45)How pharmaceutical companies can influence health consumer groups (5:00)How pharmaceutical companies can influence drug and therapeutic committees within health services or at a state level (18:30)The minimal guidance for drug and therapeutic committees on integrity and decision-making, and the lack of transparency and oversight (27:00)One thing you can go away and do today (41:00) Show notes: Two research papers from Lisa Parker and colleagues: Parker, L., Bennett, A., Mintzes, B., Grundy, Q., Fabbri, A., Karanges, E. A., & Bero, L. (2021). “There are ways… drug companies will get into DTC decisions”: How Australian drug and therapeutics committees address pharmaceutical industry influence. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 87(5), 2341-2353. Parker, L., Grundy, Q., Fabbri, A., Mintzes, B., & Bero, L. (2021). ‘Lines in the sand’: an Australian qualitative study of patient group practices to promote independence from pharmaceutical industry funders. BMJ open, 11(2), e045140. Resources: Principles to guide consumer health groups: https://chf.org.au/sites/default/files/docs/ah20206.pdf  A guide for health consumer groups on funding and transparency:https://www.hcnsw.org.au/trust-and-transparency/